Author: Michael Salla

Alex Jones on Arab Spring & Globalism – an exopolitics perspective

Pin It

Alex Jones Infowars Radio ShowBy Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Tripoli has fallen to a rebel advance and freedom loving people in Libya and around the world are celebrating the fall of Muammar Gaddafi. A cause for celebration given Gaddafi’s four decades old eccentric hold over Libya. Not so according to a giant in the alternative media – Alex Jones. Jones is a champion of the 911 Truth movement, and indeed the first to expose 911 as a false flag operation. Alex Jones has been at the forefront of efforts to warn the American public about the dangers of an unchecked police state, unfettered corporate power, secretive groups, and exploitative international banking. Jones’ websites, and are filled with articles that broadly fall under the rubric of anti-globalism. Globalists, according to Jones and supporters, are those advocating the formation of a New World Order wherein government authority is centralized around the planet. A New World Order would be one wherein big government, big corporations and secretive organizations such as the Bilderberg Group dominate international politics and finances.

According to Jones, globalists use cherished U.S. Constitutional principles such as democracy and rule of law as fig leaves for the ever-steady effort to centralize life all over the planet into a future fascist, corporatist state. That’s why the Arab Spring, where young Arab protestors overthrow despots who have held power for decades, is criticized by Jones as a sham. The real agenda is to remove Arab dictators opposed to globalists now ready to expand into the Arab world in order to promote international banking, corporate penetration, etc.

Jones stance on the Arab Spring and support for dictators appears odd at first given mainstream media coverage of events in Libya, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, but is consistent with the anti-globalism Jones espouses. For Jones, better the little devil of Arab dictators firmly controlling their populations, than the big devil of globalists adding the Arab world to their international balance sheets. So the big question becomes, is Jones right? In many respects, Jones is insightful in his geo-political analysis, yet fails in a major way to understand the underlying dynamics driving international politics and events such as the Arab Spring. He fails to seriously consider the question of extraterrestrial life, and how an exopolitics perspective would change the way we view geo-political events.

Alex Jones, like many media personalities with large listening audiences, has largely sidestepped the question of extraterrestrial life. Jones has avoided immersing himself into controversies of whether or not extraterrestrial life is visiting our world and whether a “Cosmic Watergate” is occurring. Instead, he has considered the possibility that a fake alien invasion can be staged, and has publicly commented about an alien false flag operation. Jones position here is both consistent and cautious. He acknowledges that a false flag operation featuring alien life could be done with holographic technologies, without acknowledging that extraterrestrial life is real and is being covered up. In this cautious way, Jones has introduced his audience to the alien issue, but solely in the context of a possible future false flag operation. This is where Jones’ caution prevents him from seeing the bigger picture. That is visiting extraterrestrial life has been interacting with governments, corporations, military and private citizens for at least six decades. The policies implemented to shield all this from the world public all fall under the rubric of ‘exopolitics’ – the politics of extraterrestrial life.


The field of exopolitics is vast in its implications across all aspects of human life, and directly impacts on Jones’ central concern of the dangers of globalism. For Jones, globalism is driven by the avarice of international bankers and transnational corporations wanting to penetrate and control new markets and populations. That’s true to an extent, and we have much to learn from Jones and his supporters in that regard. If Jones, however, peeled back the onion layers a little more he would find a deeper dynamic behind globalism. A powerful factor behind globalism is the need for those in control of the extraterrestrial issue – to gain control over any extraterrestrial artifacts, knowledge or contacts found throughout the planet. The best way of understanding exopolitics is to consider that for at least six decades, major governments and militaries have worked secretly together to gain intelligence and conduct counter-intelligence on extraterrestrial life and technology. In addition, covert operations have been led around the planet wherever any information, technology or contact with extraterrestrials has occurred.

Organizations such as the Bilderburg Group, Council of Foreign Relations, etc., have played key roles by providing the intellectual firepower on how such a network of intelligence, counter-intelligence and covert operations can be conducted without the world’s populations learning about it. Globalism, in that respect, provides a very useful process for being able to conduct such operations across international borders. More importantly, international cooperation on the extraterrestrial issue has led to the creation of a “breakaway civilization” in highly classified underground and undersea bases. According to some credible sources, there are even human colonies on the moon, Mars and beyond. For many readers that might appear to be sheer science fiction. Yet once thorough research is conducted, the conclusion is inescapable.

The existence of a breakaway civilization is one of the great failings of contemporary world politics, and especially for progressive thinkers who have eschewed serious discussion of the extraterrestrial issue. The most advanced technologies known to humanity have been secretly developed and used in vast network of classified projects without any kind of oversight by representative government institutions, media or population. So where does Jones and his take on the dangers of globalism fit into this exopolitics picture?

Globalism is simply a process that can be used for good or evil depending on how it is managed by those with the most influence in directing and controlling it. In making globalism the big devil of the progressive movement and alternative media, Jones errs. He makes the profound mistake of not recognizing that it is how globalism is currently being managed that is the problem. Globalism can be a very good thing in monitoring and regulating international practices, especially when it comes to introducing transparency and accountability into the classified programs that have been conducted for decades around the planet. Humanity has a need-to-know what technologies have been secretly developed. This will require transparency not only in classified military programs; but, more importantly, classified corporate programs around the planet that defy oversight by any government or military agency. In the United States alone, the amount of black budget funds siphoned by the CIA into this network of deep black programs was estimated to be up to 1.7 trillion a year over the three year period from 1998 to 2000.

The reflexive anti-globalist stance, taken by Alex Jones and supporters has the unintended consequence of facilitating the continued secrecy that makes possible classified military and corporate programs across international borders. An anti-globalist ‘every country mind-their-own business’ approach encourages opacity and unaccountability across international borders. Anti-globalism eschews international cooperation and the strengthening of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and International Criminal Court. At the same time, one needs to be wary that globalism is not hijacked in order to facilitate corporations and military programs seeking to secretly manage even more extraterrestrial information and contact all over the planet. Done correctly, globalism can help expose and bring to account those responsible for hiding how advanced extraterrestrial technologies have been secretly developed and used.

Supporting peoples struggling for democratic governments such as we are witnessing in Libya, Syria and other Arab Spring countries is an important means for promoting transparency and accountability across international borders. Alex Jones reflexive anti-globalist agenda not only unintentionally supports recalcitrant dictators in the Arab world, but also aids those that have secretly controlled a vast complex of secret projects and covert operations focused on extraterrestrial life and technology. The world has a need-to-know what has secretly happened behind the closed doors of highly classified compartmentalized alien related projects spanning the globe. We should not be afraid of globalism. Wisely embraced, globalism can bring about the kind of transparency and accountability across international borders needed to protect humanity’s freedoms well into the 21st century

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact:

Pin It

Scientific Study adopts unrealistic stance on extraterrestrial contact

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Extraterrestrial contact where humanity is almost destroyed to protect the ecosystem

There has been a flurry of recent stories by The Guardian and other major world media about the possible benefits or harm that may occur after contact with advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. The stories were sparked by a scientific study published in the June/July edition of Acta Astronautica. Titled, “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” the study examines a number of scenarios concerning extraterrestrial contact. It adopts the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) paradigm that intelligent extraterrestrial life has not yet been discovered, and that scientific modalities such as radio signals are among the most feasible ways of establishing communications. The study examines the FERMI paradox, first established by Enrico Fermi, that alien life should be abundant in our galaxy, but he asked “where are they?”

Responses to the Fermi Paradox by the authors leads to three possible scenarios. The last scenario examined is the Zoo hypothesis that Aliens may be studying us remotely or invisibly, reminiscent of the non-interference principle popularized by the Star Trek series as the Prime Directive. They explain: “ETI are treating Earth like a wildlife preserve to be observed but not fully incorporated into the Galactic Club.”

The main purpose of the study (which I’ll abbreviate as “A Scenario Analysis” – full paper is here) is to answer the question: “If contact between humans and ETI is possible, then it is important to consider the capability of ETI to cause us benefit or harm” (p.6) In stressing the importance of the question, they go on to point out: “we do have a compelling reason to believe that ETI would be significantly stronger than us and therefore highly capable of causing our total destruction.”

The authors go on to consider extraterrestrial ethics. They write:

If ETI are significantly more advanced than humanity, then the outcome of contact may depend primarily on ETI desires. However, this leaves open speculation as to the specific desires of ETI and raises the question of what ethical framework they follow. Much can be said about ETI ethics. Here we focus on one key aspect: selfishness vs. universalism (p. 7).

In response, the authors examine three broad motivations or ethics of extraterrestrials. Basically, extraterrestrials would fall into categories of the good, the bad, or the indifferent leading to three broad scenarios. Considerable discussion is given to each scenario, and the benefits or harm to humanity. Of special interest is the possibility that “good extraterrestrials”, may decide to wipe out humanity for a higher good such as preserving the eco-system. This frightening scenario was vividly demonstrated in the 2008 remake of the Sci-Fi Classic, The Day the Earth Stood Still.

“Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” is a very useful summary of a priori speculations about extraterrestrial life. It is the latest in a series of scientific speculations about contact with extraterrestrial life. Recent scientific discoveries such as exoplanets in habitable regions of solar systems, abundance of water found in our solar system, and the ability of life to flourish in extreme biological conditions has stimulated scientific curiosity about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. This inevitably leads to questions about the motivations of advanced extraterrestrial life after contact with them is made by SETI or other means.

What “A Scenario Analysis” fails to do is to actively engage with the more than abundant evidence that humanity is currently being visited by extraterrestrial life. In the abstract, the authors categorically state: “humanity has not yet observed any extraterrestrial intelligence.” Yet there is an incredible amount of physical evidence concerning sightings of UFOs under intelligent control displaying flight characteristics far above what is known to be possible in conventional or even classified aerospace research. In addition, there are also numerous whistleblower reports concerning crashes of UFOs, and retrievals of extraterrestrial biological entities. Finally, there are also first hand witness reports of contacts, both voluntary and involuntary, with extraterrestrial entities. Rather than acknowledge the existence of such evidence, the scientific study chooses to dismiss it all together adopting the well known SETI perspective that no extraterrestrial contact has yet been made.

In failing to even acknowledge the extensive literature that contact has already been made, and that a successful cover-up has occurred by select government, military, corporate actors, “A Scenario Analysis”is taking an unrealistic stance. Basically, it is ignoring the possibility that UFOlogy and exopolitical literature may contribute substantially to answering the main goal of the authors in answering whether extraterrestrial contact would be more harmful or beneficial to humanity.

For example, an innovative course in the new field of exopolitics titled “The “Science, Spirituality and Politics of Extraterrestrial Civilizations” offers a different conceptual framework for examining how extraterrestrials may benefit or harm humanity during contact. The course, taught in the Exopolitics Institute a examines how a typology of extraterrestrial civilizations based on energy consumption might help us understand how different alien societies behave, and how the available literature helps illustrate this. Another exopolitics course, both of which begin in mid-September, “The Role of Hollywood and the Media in the Disclosure Process,” examines how Hollywood is helping prepare humanity for both the beneficial and harmful aspects of various contact scenarios.

It is encouraging to see an increasing number of scientists openly engage with scientific, social, political and even economic consequences of the discovery of extraterrestrial life. Ongoing scientific discoveries make it clear that the conditions for the life flourish throughout the galaxy. This makes scientific curiosity over the motivations of intelligent extraterrestrial life inevitable. Encouraging scientific speculation on the basis of what can be deduced from NASA and other Space Agency press releases or peer reviewed scientific journals should not require an outright dismissal of the abundant literature from the fields of UFOlogy and exopolitics that extraterrestrial contact has already occurred. It would be basically advocating the very unscientific approach that a priori reasoning on the benefits and harm of extraterrestrial contact should be encouraged, while simultaneously dismissing all a posteriori evidence and arguments concerning the benefits and harm of such contact. If the Zoo Hypothesis is the more accurate answer to the Fermi Paradox, the authors of “A Scenario Analysis” might have to acknowledge that they might be among the majority of Zoo dwellers that have been kept in the dark by their Zoo keepers about who might be watching them

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla.

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact:

UFOlogy Grand Deception–hiding the truth about human looking ETs

First Contact meeting with Italian ETs
Graphic of First Contact: first Friendship case meeting between 8 & 3 foot tall extraterrestrials with thee Italian witnesses.

Ask any UFOlogist about the reality of extraterrestrial life, and you’ll most likely get one of three versions of what is happening. The first is that we have been witnessing UFOs since the mid-1940s that offer abundant physical evidence of other worldly technologies sighted in our skies. This leads to the conclusion that someUFOs are extraterrestrial space vehicles observing our world, especially locations where nuclear weapons were being developed or stored. The second most popular version is that since the early 1960s, short “gray aliens” have been abducting people for genetic experimentation. The thirdis that some UFOs have crashed, and that strange looking “gray aliens” have been recovered along with advanced technologies for study in classified reverse engineering programs.Ufology’s three main versions of what is happening with extraterrestrial life is grounded in abundant empirical data. There are tens of thousands of cases from around the world involving physical sightings, radar trackings, photographs, film and testimony of UFO sightings. Similarly, there are thousands of first hand testimonies revealing the existence of alien abductions, and a genetic program conducted by strange looking extraterrestrials with human subjects. Finally, many hundreds of witnesses have come forward to confirm that some UFOs have crashed, and that the technology and occupants have been removed for highly classified study.

All three versions make up what is today known as scientific UFOlogy, and claims that this is as close as one gets to real science when it comes to the question of extraterrestrial visitation. The problem with all three versions of scientific UFOlogy is that they mask something that has long been officially kept hidden from the public. A secret that many leading UFOlogists have actively conspired to keep, along with government agencies encouraging such a process. Human looking extraterrestrials have been visiting our world and making contact with the general public since the beginning of the modern UFO era.

Stories of human looking extraterrestrials making contact with members of the general public first became known in the early 1950s. Famed contactees such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry, George Van Tassel, Orfeo Angelucci, and many other “contactees” from around the world thrilled the public with their accounts of meetings with extraterrestrial humans that in some cases where stunningly attractive. In many cases, the early contactees backed up their stories with supporting witness testimonies, photographs, film and other forms of physical evidence. The response from the world’s leading UFOlogists, let alone government authorities, was ridicule, derision, and outright dismissal.

Basically, the world’s leading UFOlogists – concluding that extraterrestrial life was visiting the earth and that select government/military agencies were keeping this secret from the public – were not interested in stories that extraterrestrials had made physical contact. Logically, one would assume that if extraterrestrials made the long journey to Earth from wherever they came from in the galaxy, that they would make contact with members of the public, let alone government authorities – that’s another story. Genuine stories of physical contact would be logical to assume, but UFOlogists employed another form of logic to dismiss such accounts. Yes, extraterrestrials were visiting and there was great public interest, but this unfortunately would lead to many charlatans and frauds deceiving the public with contrived contact stories. UFOlogists had to be on constant guard to filter out the many bogus contact stories if there was any chance that the conventional scientific community would take UFOlogy seriously. UFOlogists used the possibility of fraud to justify an impractically high evidentiary barrier for any claiming to have had physical contact with the occupants of flying saucers.

Consequently, the leading UFOlogists of the 1950s, experts such as Major Donald Keyhoe were quick to dismiss and ridicule the contactee stories. When the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon (NICAP) was created in 1956, it quickly become the preeminent UFOlogy organization for almost two decades, its leading officers and investigators were in agreement. Not one of the many contactee stories deserved serious scientific interest. None met the arbitrarily high evidentiary barrier created by UFOlogists such as Keyhoe and NICAP. Unfortunately, whether out of bias, shortsightedness or active collusion with government/military authorities, NICAP and leading UFOlogists led the charge to dismiss from public debate claims that human looking extraterrestrials have made contact.

More importantly, any aspiring UFOlogist quickly learned that if s/he was to be taken seriously by their peers, they should not study contactee accounts, and needed to reaffirm the prevailing orthodoxy that contactee accounts were the realm of outright fraud and deception. Many of Keyhoe’s peers and successors, UFOlogists such as Stanton Friedman, Richard Hall, James McDonald, Jacques Vallee, and many others dismissed contactee accounts as fanciful fabrications. Even UFOlogists such as Budd Hopkins and Dr David Jacobs, sympathetic to accounts of abductions by grey aliens that first emerged in the 1960s, dismissed stories of contact with human looking extraterrestrials as outright hoaxes. Examination of Richard Dolan’s two volume UFOs and the National Security State – the preeminent history of modern day UFOlogy – reveals a similar shortsighted dismissal of contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials. Adamski gets barely a mention in his unofficial history of UFOlogy, and other contactee testimonies are ignored altogether. Dolan’s book, aspiring to set the record straight about how the U.S. National Security System has historically dealt with the UFO phenomenon, fails dismally when it comes to examining claims of contact with human looking extraterrestrials and their significance.

Dismissal by the world’s leading UFOlogists of the many contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials has not been universal. British researchers such as Timothy Good (author of Alien Base) and the recently deceased Wendelle Stevens did investigate contactee stories and concluded that some, if not many, of the claims were accurate descriptions of real events. More recently, testimony has emerged from Italy concerning a case of contact with human looking extraterrestrials from the 1950s to 1970s that involved hundreds of witnesses, photographs and film. Apparently, a large base of human looking extraterrestrials existed for a twenty two year period from 1956 around the north-eastern coast of Italy, and the aliens worked with humans to supply their base with food and other physical materials. Meanwhile the Italian military, along with other European military authorities and NATO, closely monitored the aliens but did little to interfere with their operations. A book, Mass Contact, was written about the Friendship case by a retired Professor in civil engineering, Stefano Breccia, and published in English in 2009. A documentary featuring Breccia and other witnesses was made about the case and is now available on Youtube.

Anyone drawn to the modern UFO phenomenon will find an abundance of experts and authorities claiming that serious UFOlogy is focused either on sightings of unusual aerial phenomena (UFOs); human abductions by strange grey looking aliens; or secret UFO crash retrieval operations. To this day, many UFOlogists will act as “gate-keepers” dismissing, if not vigorously attacking, any claims of physical contact with human looking extraterrestrials – regardless of any supporting evidence. In this regard, UFOlogy and its leading proponents are perpetrating a grand deception orchestrated, to some degree, by the same military-intelligence-corporate authorities that are keeping the truth about extraterrestrial life from the public. The truth about human looking extraterrestrials directly contacting private individuals, and government/military authorities for that matter, has been UFOlogy’s best kept secret. Thanks to cases like Friendship now emerging that secret is slowly unraveling, and a more comprehensive exopolitical understanding of extraterrestrial life and its real impact on Earth will be reached.

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla.

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact:

Copyright © 2019 Exopolitics Institute News Service. All Rights Reserved.